Pissed @ Editor

[Faent]

So I submit a paper in area Y to top-tier journal X which publishes primarily in area Y. The editor doesn't send my paper out to referees, claiming that it was only marginally within the scope of the journal (Z) and that, though the paper looks good, I should submit it elsewhere.

Ok. Z is not the scope of this journal. So that's bullshit. One hopes the editor knows what the scope of his journal is.

So perhaps this was a poorly worded claim to the effect that the paper was on topic Z, and since the scope of the journal is Y, it fell outside the journal's scope. That is also false. The paper OBVIOUSLY and MANIFESTLY had nothing to do with Z.

I am left to assume that the editor glanced at the paper's title and assumed it was on topic Z on the basis of one word that occurs in that title. If so, then he doesn't know area Y and also didn't read the first sentence of the paper.

[BriarFox]

Change the title and resubmit it, then, if you think that's the case. Say you've refocused the paper or some nonsense. It's also possible that the editor may be trying to change the direction of the journal, if s/he's not just confused.

[Ignot]

Is this a math problem? :thinking:

[Faent]

I think I'm going to shoot him an e-mail and ask for "clarification" (since, you know, if the journal topic has suddently drastically changed this is important information). If I don't get a *request* to resubmit as a result, I'm going to submit to another journal in the same group that's a wee bit better.

No, it's not math.

[StrayRogue]

This makes no sense.

lol just be glad you got a response from the editor. He knows his magazine better than you do. End of discussion.

[Cephalopod]

If I don't get a *request* to resubmit as a result, I'm going to submit to another journal in the same group that's a wee bit better.

Why wouldn't you have done this in the first place?

[Faent]

Because this journal has been carrying more of the debate in the subarea of the area I'm submitting in. So giving them first shot was a way of saying thanks. It was just courtesy.

[Parkbandit]

So I submit a paper in area Y to top-tier journal X which publishes primarily in area Y. The editor doesn't send my paper out to referees, claiming that it was only marginally within the scope of the journal (Z) and that, though the paper looks good, I should submit it elsewhere.

Ok. Z is not the scope of this journal. So that's bullshit. One hopes the editor knows what the scope of his journal is.

So perhaps this was a poorly worded claim to the effect that the paper was on topic Z, and since the scope of the journal is Y, it fell outside the journal's scope. That is also false. The paper OBVIOUSLY and MANIFESTLY had nothing to do with Z.

I am left to assume that the editor glanced at the paper's title and assumed it was on topic Z on the basis of one word that occurs in that title. If so, then he doesn't know area Y and also didn't read the first sentence of the paper.

Why would you assume that? Could it possibly be that your paper was not as good as you believe it to be?

If your changes don't work out.. you should go force that editor to publish it. Just because it's his job to sift out the shitty papers that don't deserve to be published doesn't mean anything. I mean.. he's probably only been in that position for like 20 years.. what the fuck does he know!?

[CrystalTears]

Someone doesn't seem to take rejection well.

[Parkbandit]

Someone doesn't seem to take rejection well.

Weird.. you would think he would be used to it by now.

[Faent]

Yes Parkbandit, it could be that when the editor rejects a paper because he thinks it sucks, he typically does so by babbling incoherently. Perhaps he also typically suggests you submit your paper to another journal that suits its topic better, since it was not rejected because it was bad (but because it was off-topic).

Forcing anyone to publish anything is not the issue. Typically, if your paper sucks, you are informed that it was rejected because it sucks. You are not typically informed your paper was rejected because of [insert utter nonsense here]. Please work on your reading comprehension.

[iJin]

I feel as if you are leaving necessary information out of this in order for us to judge the situation correctly.

[CrystalTears]

I feel as if you are leaving necessary information out of this in order for us to judge the situation correctly.
FAENT WOULD NEVER DO SUCH A THING OF MAKING HIMSELF LOOK BETTER!!

Wait... what?

[iJin]

oh em gee, I forgot my sarcastic tone.

CT, IM GOING TO DELETE MY POSTS NOW!11

Edit: Shit. I forgot the face. Ahem, ";__;".

[Parkbandit]

Yes Parkbandit, it could be that when the editor rejects a paper because he thinks it sucks, he typically does so by babbling incoherently. Perhaps he also typically suggests you submit your paper to another journal that suits its topic better, since it was not rejected because it was bad (but because it was off-topic).

Forcing anyone to publish anything is not the issue. Typically, if your paper sucks, you are informed that it was rejected because it sucks. You are not typically informed your paper was rejected because of [insert utter nonsense here]. Please work on your reading comprehension.


I read your entire post.. I just am amused that you assume that the editor didn't read your paper as the only conclusion to why he didn't publish it. Why don't you post this magnificent masterpiece on these forums... then you can claim victory!

[Faent]

All relevant information has been provided. Anyone who knew anything would, at this point, have to concur that the editor's reaction was BIZARRE. Because PB And CT are so utterly clueless about how the intelligent part of the world functions, they aren't in a position to make an informed judgment. The appropriate reaction to their posts is to point at them and laugh pitiably.

The only relevant information you need to know is that the alleged reason for not sending the paper out to referees was obviously false no matter how you cut it, and worse, poorly worded too.

[CrystalTears]

This makes no sense.

lol just be glad you got a response from the editor. He knows his magazine better than you do. End of discussion.
QFT

[Nieninque]

I have no idea what you are talking about.
I shall assume your paper makes as much sense.

[Faent]

I read your entire post..

PB, we all now that you "read" like a three year old "reads".


I just am amused that you assume that the editor didn't read your paper as the only conclusion to why he didn't publish it.

"Conclusion to why"? WTF kind of language is that? Also, publishing the paper was never at issue (which you would have known if you could read). The issue under discussion was the CITED REASON FOR not sending it TO REFEREES. Finally, I was INFERRING that the paper wasn't read from the CONTENT OF THE CITED REASON. But again, you're too stupid to be able to make these obvious distinctions.

[Nieninque]

I have no idea what you are talking about.
I shall assume your paper makes as much sense.

[Parkbandit]

There are 330+ posts by Faent on these forums to base this opinion on.

Faent is an idiot.

I'm sure the editor came to the same conclusion.


But hey.. good luck on your paper! I can't wait to read it.

[Faent]

Faent is an idiot.

I'd take that more seriously if you could think or read worth a wit. I should also probably not bother to point out your mistakes to you in writing, since you can't understand the written word in the first place. But I will note the irony of someone who is (provably, see above) incapable of tracking the discussion in a handful of posts calling anyone an idiot.

[Jorddyn]

All relevant information has been provided. Anyone who knew anything would, at this point, have to concur that the editor's reaction was BIZARRE. Because PB And CT are so utterly clueless about how the intelligent part of the world functions, they aren't in a position to make an informed judgment. The appropriate reaction to their posts is to point at them and laugh pitiably.

And yet, the editor of a top tier journal seems to agree with them, not you.

Huh. Interesting.

[Liagala]

since you can't understand the written word in the first place.

Wrong insult to use against someone on a GS message board. Just sayin'.

[Faent]

And yet, the editor of a top tier journal seems to agree with them, not you. Huh. Interesting.

It is interesting. The editor was also babbling incoherently. That's also interesting. And a reason to be pissed. GTFO.

[Parkbandit]

Wrong insult to use against someone on a GS message board. Just sayin'.

Let him be.. he's getting upset now. The editor r dum. Everyone here r dum.

He r good righter.

[Faent]

Let him be.. he's getting upset now.

I've been in a foul mood since this morning, sure.


The editor r dum.

I didn't say that. I said he was babbling incoherently. In your case, incoherent babbling is evidence of your stupidity. In the editor's case, it is not.


Everyone here r dum.

Not everyone. But you? Definitely.


He r good righter.

You've probably assumed I said that too. That's because your brain is miswired. Or because your head is crammed up your asshole.

[CrystalTears]

It's really difficult to help when you're being a vague schmuck about what the paper and journal is about.

It's not like we can stalk you through the article since it got rejected. It's not like we would want to anyway.

Just remember that you think we're all beneath you, but you're the one coming here for confirmation about what the editor of a journal said about your piece.

[Jorddyn]

Bets on real story?

I'm going for the editor read the first paragraph, decided it was crap, and sent out a form letter.

[Parkbandit]

It's really difficult to help when you're being a vague schmuck about what the paper and journal is about.

It's not like we can stalk you through the article since it got rejected. It's not like we would want to anyway.

Just remember that you think we're all beneath you, but you're the one coming here for confirmation about what the editor of a journal said about your piece.

BUT HE DOESN'T WANT ANYONE TO STEAL HIS IDEAS!

http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/This-Thread-Delivers/1/thread-delivers.jpg

[Parkbandit]

Bets on real story?

I'm going for the editor read the first paragraph, decided it was crap, and sent out a form letter.

U R DUM.

[Jorddyn]

U R DUM.

Case #2: State vs. Jorddyn

[Faent]

Bets on real story? I'm going for the editor read the first paragraph, decided it was crap, and sent out a form letter.

Possibly. At least you're not being an idiot now. Congrats.

[Faent]

It's really difficult to help when you're being a vague schmuck about what the paper and journal is about.

You were asked to perform the difficult mental task of treating the discussion in the abstract, or, perhaps, of substituting whatever you liked for the variables. Perhaps that was too much to expect, but vagueness isn't relevant.


Just remember that you think we're all beneath you, but you're the one coming here for confirmation about what the editor of a journal said about your piece.

Maybe you come here for confirmation. I don't. You're of course free to respond to my posts however you like. But if you choose to respond like a moron, I get to make fun of you. That's how this works. When you do respond like a moron, well, yes, I tend to assume you're beneath me. Feel free to make the same assumption if you think I respond to you like a moron.


Someone doesn't seem to take rejection well.

FYI, 95% of papers are rejected. You resubmit. Rejection wasn't the issue. Since you missed the issue, I responded to you like you were a moron.

[Jorddyn]

Possibly. At least you're not being an idiot now. Congrats.


That makes one of us.

[CrystalTears]

Translation: I'm not going to tell anyone what the fuck I'm talking about, but it will give me a chance to call them stupid for not understanding my point.

Resubmit the piece and STFU. Thanks.

[Joe]

FYI, 95% of papers are rejected.


Does it feel good to finally be in the majority?

[Faent]

No.

[NocturnalRob]

Faent, you're acting like a child. I'm assuming you're pissed because you feel your paper wasn't given the read you feel it properly deserves (and not because you were rejected).


All relevant information has been provided. Anyone who knew anything would, at this point, have to concur that the editor's reaction was BIZARRE.
wow, Faent, given this informative gem, you should definitely be running this journal as opposed to the current editor.

Stop blaming other people for your rejected paper and own up to the fact that PERHAPS it wasn't the ground-breaking piece of literary genius that you thought it was. Either that, or you titled your paper as skillfully as a kid with down syndrome does calculus.

Either way, you're acting like a fucking pussy. Quit bitching about one editor and submit it to another journal.

[Euler]

here is why you are wrong. Editor is not the one vote in deciding to publish or not to publish based on quality. Editor sends it to (depending on discipline) several readers. Readers are acknowledged experts in the field. One of three things then happens:

1. (most common) Thanks but no thanks. They can candy coat it. They can be blunt. Whatever they say, the writing is not up to their standards, the idea is not up to their standards, or the topic is not something they are interested in.

2. Revise and resubmit. You will get the notes from the readers, but not their identity. You revise to their suggestions, or offer reasons why you chose to ignore the revision suggestion. You then resubmit and one of three things happen. (Goto 10)

3. Thanx! We love your paper and publish it as is. Then the secret second step. Finally profit.

It makes you sound semi-retarded to suggest the editor doesn't know how to select papers. If it is a journal of any standing, the editor wouldn't be the editor if s/he didn't know his/her shit.

[StrayRogue]

Most editors I've "cold-called" generally don't get back to you at all unless you A) go through an agent B) have something genuinely worthwhile they want or C) have worked with them before.

[Euler]

I think he is writing for an academic press.

[BriarFox]

I think he is writing for an academic press.

Euler, you missed the point where he refused to send it to referees. I'm sure Faent knows how the process works.

[StrayRogue]

Still the same, with the difference that it generally has a smaller reader-base and a smaller contributing pool. Even then depending on the area the editor could be very busy.

[Euler]

Euler, you missed the point where he refused to send it to referees. I'm sure Faent knows how the process works.

you are sure? I read his original post as the editor didn't understand/read his paper and was therefore an idiot. It didn't seem to me that he (Faent) understood much about academic publishing at all. I don't know what discipline he writes for, so I don't know if I have read any of his work. To me he reads as a grad student desperate for his first publication. I could be totally wrong though.

Faent, what journals have you published in?

[thefarmer]

As someone who is the editor of a very prominent publication, Gemstone IV: Creative Writing at it's Best, I think you should submit it to me. I will go over it with my staff then contact you.

PS. Based on what you've posted here, I have no doubt I'll be able to include it in our upcoming publication.

Email an attached document to GSIVEDITOR@play.net

[Euler]

can i get in on that? I have mad ideas!!!!!shiftone!!!!111

Most people don't read past my titles though.

[thefarmer]

can i get in on that? I have mad ideas!!!!!shiftone!!!!111

Most people don't read past my titles though.

All submissions will be reviewed, though I should warn you that we're VERY interested in articles on Monks (due to the profession being released within a few days).

[Faent]

you are sure? I read his original post as the editor didn't understand/read his paper and was therefore an idiot.

I think you should reread my first post, Euler. It is sometimes the case that papers are rejected without having been read. That's dubious, but fine, whatever. In some such cases, editors have even been known to mention this fact (that they didn't even read the paper).

Since my complaint was *very* clearly stated, CT's remarks notwithstanding, I am not going to repeat it here. Again, see the first post in this thread.


It didn't seem to me that he (Faent) understood much about academic publishing at all.

I'd be interested in seeing you try to substantiate that with *anything* I've said so far.

[Euler]

Well, I have a monk article out to journal y, but journal x left chicago going west at 56 mph. Meanwhile, Journal p left San Diego ....

[CrystalTears]

I love how I'm the one being singled out here when I'm not the only one who told you to suck it up and/or resubmit.

[Euler]

Ok. Z is not the scope of this journal. So that's bullshit. One hopes the editor knows what the scope of his journal is.

The paper OBVIOUSLY and MANIFESTLY had nothing to do with Z.

Z on the basis of one word that occurs in that title. If so, then he doesn't know area Y .


I guess it was the part where you:

1. Assume the editor doesn't know what the journal is about.

2. Claim you paper is clear and obvious and doesn't have anything to do with what the editor thought it was about. (Maybe not as clear as you think?)

3. Again assume editor has NO content knowledge.


Hey, you are probably a superstar. I am just a fat guy waiting for an online roleplaying game to come back up. Don't take anything I say to heart. If it helps you sleep better, the editor is clearly a moron. Don't even consider reworking the article.

[Jorddyn]

I love how I'm the one being singled out here when I'm not the only one who told you to suck it up and/or resubmit.

That's because you're dumb. Obviously.

[Faent]

I guess it was the part where you: 1. Assume the editor doesn't know what the journal is about.

Let's work some logic, shall we? Suppose one of two options must be true, that is, suppose the disjunction (p or q) is true. Then if p is false, q is true.

Now consider the following sentence: This paper is only marginally within the scope of the journal (African swallow studies).

You may or may not be sensitive to the ambiguity in that sentence. On a natural reading, the claim is that (1) the journal wants articles on African swallows. On an unnatural reading, the claim might be that (2) my paper was on African swallow studies.

Do you see the disjunction now? It's (1) or (2). Good boy! Now (1) is true only if the editor doesn't know what the journal publishes on (since it doesn't publish on African swallows). That's all I said about the editor.

Reading comprehension please?


Claim you paper is clear and obvious and doesn't have anything to do with what the editor thought it was about. (Maybe not as clear as you think?)

Um, no.

[thefarmer]

Let's work some logic, shall we? Suppose one of two options must be true, that is, suppose the disjunction (p or q) is true. Then if p is false, q is true.

Now consider the following sentence: This paper is only marginally within the scope of the journal (African swallow studies).

You may or may not be sensitive to the ambiguity in that sentence. On a natural reading, the claim is that (1) the journal wants articles on African swallows. On an unnatural reading, the claim might be that (2) my paper was on African swallow studies.

Do you see the disjunction now? It's (1) or (2). Good boy! Now (1) is true only if the editor doesn't know what the journal publishes on (since it doesn't publish on African swallows). That's all I said about the editor.

Reading comprehension please?

Or 3, where 3 = neither 1 nor 2.

[Faent]

I certainly didn't exhaust all the options as Jorddyn kindly observed.

[Euler]

Logic, fine.
I know you are painfully clear, but I am dense.

So you are claiming that since the journal does NOT publish on P, the reading of the sentence MUST be that your paper is about P, hence the rejection?

You are upset because anyone who has any reading comprehension can easily and quickly determine that said paper is ~P.

Am I good so far? I hope so. I will boldly continue.

The editor thought your paper was P
Anyone with reading comprehension can tell your paper is ~P
Ergo, editor, like me fails at reading comprehension.

an unfortunate dilemna for the journal. An editor who is unable to read even the most clearly laid out arguements? Sucks. I wouldn't want to be associated with them. I say they did you a favor by not accepting your paper. Go find a journal with an editor who knows how to read.

[StrayRogue]

I think he should send this thread to the editor. It's DEFINATELY going to get published then!!!!111

But seriously, this kind of attitude will get you nowhere in any form of literary avenue.

[Euler]

I can't believe nobody has made an african spit/swallow joke.

[Faent]

You are good so far, Euler. But I don't think the editor fails at reading comprehension. If he was being sincere, I think he just glanced at it and assumed it was on P.

[Euler]

would you allow then that since his glance, which I stipulate was hastey and careless, failed to grasp the true nature of your article, it may have been a bit of an overstatement to claim that :


The paper OBVIOUSLY and MANIFESTLY had nothing to do with Z.

[Faent]

I would not say that's an overstatement. Of course, when I said "obviously" and "manifestly" I meant "obviously (if you read the paper)", etc...

[Euler]

would you agree that when you need to say what you "meant" rather than what you said, you are being less than clear?

I am not in anyway suggesting that your paper may not have been clear because of this. I am sure you spend much more time crafting a sentence for publication than you do for a forum. I am simply pointing out that it may be possible that, and this is of course in addition to my idiocy, your posts here are not as coherant as you think them to be and that this may be the reason I took you as a whiny little snit rather than a maligned scholar.

[Faent]

I would certainly agree that if I need to say what I meant (in different words in order to succeed at conveying my meaning), I have been less than clear.

I don't agree that I needed to restate myself. If I say "It's obvious that there's a tree over there" I pretty clearly mean something like "If you look over there, the tree will be obvious." If I say "It's obvious that the wall is red" I mean something like "If your eyes are functioning properly, and you look at the wall in ordinary lighting, it will appear to be clearly red." If I say "It's obvious that so-and-so has awkward prose" I mean "If you read so-and-so, it will be obvious the prose is awkward."

[NocturnalRob]

I love how I'm the one being singled out here when I'm not the only one who told you to suck it up and/or resubmit.
YOU STFU AND GET BACK IN YOUR HOLE!!

[CrystalTears]

Fine! I'll be the fall guy for the rest of you stupid fuckers! :(

[Ignot]

I can't believe nobody has made an african spit/swallow joke.

I was waiting for a Monty Python joke.

[Euler]

I am left to assume that the editor glanced at the paper's title and assumed it was on topic Z on the basis of one word that occurs in that title.



I would certainly agree that if I need to say what I meant (in different words in order to succeed at conveying my meaning), I have been less than clear.

these two ideas together are the foundation on which the advice that people have been giving you is built upon.

[Parkbandit]

Case #2: State vs. Jorddyn

:rofl:

I think Case #1 was thrown out for lack of evidence. Case #2 looks solid. :P

[Faent]

I ... told you to suck it up and/or resubmit.

I will. For now I'm still bitching though.

[Parkbandit]

I will. For now I'm still bitching though.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v252/Rustina/QQ.png

[Euler]

I gotta know though,
what was the title?

[LeDru]

since people were waiting.......'a swallow has to beat it's wings 48 times a second to maintain air speed velocity. Am I right?'


could have done other quotes but wanted to keep with the math theme.

[Mathari]

I think I'm going to shoot him an e-mail and ask for "clarification" (since, you know, if the journal topic has suddently drastically changed this is important information). If I don't get a *request* to resubmit as a result, I'm going to submit to another journal in the same group that's a wee bit better.
Yes, this is what you should do.

To address some of the other things said or implied in this thread (based on my own knowledge of academic journals, restricted as it is to a certain discipline):

(1) It isn't the case that you typically need either to know the editor, or to be invited to submit, or to be contributing a work of astoundingly mind-blowing genius to get an article accepted for publication in an academic journal. Most submissions are "cold" submissions, and they have to be good (even great) to be accepted, but not astounding. It could help if you know the editor, though.
(2) It's true that top-tier academic journals have about a 95% rejection rate; rejection is not a huge issue because of this.
(3) In part (but not entirely) because of (2), editors don't tend to be afraid to forthrightly reject you and explicitly state why they did so. It's unlikely that the editor made up an excuse for rejecting Faent's article in order not to tell him the real reason (unless, perhaps, Faent is an established and recognized scholar in his field). Likewise, it's unlikely that such an excuse would involve recommending that Faent continue attempting to circulate the article elsewhere, if it's really a bad article.
(4) Editors can and occasionally do make the decision to reject an article before even sending it to referees.
(5) With many journals, it is explicitly permitted that you contest a referee's decision regarding your paper; it's not necessarily absurd or arrogant to suggest that he or she missed something, as long as you can back that claim up. This is accepted practice. It therefore doesn't seem absurd merely to question the editor (in a polite manner) regarding his decision, though you'd better be really sure that you have good grounds for questioning him.

All of that said, you are behaving like a bit of a pompous jerk here, Faent.

[Faent]

All the points you've made are correct, except, perhaps, about contesting the too-swift rejection. I'm reticent to follow through on that. And for the record, I am not yet an established scholar.

I'll think I'm just going to send it elsewhere. I'm pretty confident it will make it out to referees. I obviously never expected an immediate acceptance. Almost all acceptances are revise and resubmits. And had I not gotten an R&R, I almost certainly would have received comments on the paper. At least I can say that the rejection was swift, so I haven't lost too much time having my paper under worthless review (a far too often occurrence).


(3) In part (but not entirely) because of (2), editors don't tend to be afraid to forthrightly reject you and explicitly state why they did so. It's unlikely that the editor made up an excuse for rejecting Faent's article in order not to tell him the real reason (unless, perhaps, Faent is an established and recognized scholar in his field). Likewise, it's unlikely that such an excuse would involve recommending that Faent continue attempting to circulate the article elsewhere, if it's really a bad article.

I hope this is correct. I assume that depends in large part upon the editor's personality, and I do not know this editor's personality. But thanks for the thoughts. This line of reasoning has now been reiterated by several people I trust (who are not only competent to assess the subject matter and content of the paper, but have done so).


Editors can and occasionally do make the decision to reject an article before even sending it to referees.

I would have been infinitely happier had I been given a remotely intelligible reason for rejection. When you submit to a (say) theoretical chemistry journal and you're told you've written a (say) analytical chemistry paper, so you should send it elsewhere... Well, that's discomfitting. Especially when you *know* your results, if correct, would be of *immense* interest to at least 70% of theoretical chemists and of little to no interest to analytical chemists.


With many journals, it is explicitly permitted that you contest a referee's decision regarding your paper; it's not necessarily absurd or arrogant to suggest that he or she missed something, as long as you can back that claim up. This is accepted practice. It therefore doesn't seem absurd merely to question the editor (in a polite manner) regarding his decision, though you'd better be really sure that you have good grounds for questioning him.

Contesting referees is much easier to do than contesting editors. It's often the case that referees ask you to make ridiculous changes. In fact, I think it tends to be the case that the less established and prominent the scholar reviewing your paper is, the more likely they'll produce a high quality referee report that doesn't request bullshit revisions. In such cases you usually just explain (in some detail) why you won't make the requested changes. Other times you humor them. But I'm reticent to point out to the editor that he has completely missed the fact that the very people who would want to see this paper are the readers of the journal he's editing.


All of that said, you are behaving like a bit of a pompous jerk here, Faent.

I find it to be an excellent defense against baseless insults. But true.

[iJin]

"Pompous" is such a great word.

[Mathari]

At least I can say that the rejection was swift, so I haven't lost too much time having my paper under worthless review (a far too often occurrence).

In fact, I think it tends to be the case that the less established and prominent the scholar reviewing your paper is, the more likely they'll produce a high quality referee report that doesn't request bullshit revisions.
QFT & QFT.

[Parkbandit]

And for the record, I am not yet an established scholar.


http://gallery.calebhammel.com/storage/post-02/Pwned.jpg

[Faent]

Try again, PB. You were PwN3d by the people whose image you tried to link to.

[Parkbandit]

Try again, PB. You were PwN3d by the people whose image you tried to link to.

Not really. I can see it fine. Maybe you were PwN3d by that editor again and he blocked your internetzwebz?

[Jorddyn]

:rofl:

I think Case #1 was thrown out for lack of evidence. Case #2 looks solid. :P

You bribed the judge.

In both cases.

[Faent]

Not really. I can see it fine. Maybe you were PwN3d by that editor again and he blocked your internetzwebz?

Did it occur to you to refresh?

[Ignot]

Did it occur to you to refresh?

um..that's the picture he wants. PwN3d. I could see how you could make the mistake of thinking it was a broken link but you would have to have pretty bad comprehension to make that error.

[Faent]

um..that's the picture he wants. PwN3d. I could see how you could make the mistake of thinking it was a broken link but you would have to have pretty bad comprehension to make that error.

Not bad comprehension. I just (yet again) made the mistake of assuming PB wasn't quite that pathetic. An PwN3ed pic? ROFL. Yeah, I PwN3ed myself, alright.

[Parkbandit]

Not bad comprehension. I just (yet again) made the mistake of assuming PB wasn't quite that pathetic. An PwN3ed pic? ROFL. Yeah, I PwN3ed myself, alright.

This whole thread is you pwning yourself. Read the responses. Is there one person here (besides you) that believes you didn't come across like a little bitch?

Wait.. maybe it was just CT and myself who came to that conclusion........

[Faent]

This whole thread is you pwning yourself. Read the responses. Is there one person here (besides you) that believes you didn't come across like a little bitch?

PB, I can make you my little bitch whenever I want.

[Parkbandit]

So I submit a paper in area Y to top-tier journal X which publishes primarily in area Y. The editor doesn't send my paper out to referees, claiming that it was only marginally within the scope of the journal (Z) and that, though the paper looks good, I should submit it elsewhere.

Ok. Z is not the scope of this journal. So that's bullshit. One hopes the editor knows what the scope of his journal is.

So perhaps this was a poorly worded claim to the effect that the paper was on topic Z, and since the scope of the journal is Y, it fell outside the journal's scope. That is also false. The paper OBVIOUSLY and MANIFESTLY had nothing to do with Z.

I am left to assume that the editor glanced at the paper's title and assumed it was on topic Z on the basis of one word that occurs in that title. If so, then he doesn't know area Y and also didn't read the first sentence of the paper.


Bumped to find out when the publish date is!?

:rofl:

[Back]

Bumped to find out when the publish date is!?

:rofl:

Wow. You really have a grudge.

[Parkbandit]

Wow. You really have a grudge.


From you, that's precious... and hypocritical.. all bundled up in one tight little package of stupid.

[Faent]

Bumped to find out when the publish date is!?

:rofl:

ROFL! It's still under review where it will languish for hopefully no more than another few weeks. Hopefully spring break is giving the reviewers some time to catch up on their reviewing duties.

I am suspicious that the paper has been sent out to the individual to whom I am responding, and if so, she'll know whose paper it is. This may have some interesting consequences. Will I benefit? If she doesn't recuse herself, possibly. Will she recuse herself thereby forcing the editor to find another reviewer? Comments welcome. (Mathari?)

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I am a little sad I missed this gold mine of awesomeness when it first occurred.

[Clove]

Maybe you could just change the title to Y.

[Faent]

Bump!

R&R, top 10. Almost no critical comments. I win!

[Euler]

grats. See, wasn't worth getting a sprained vagina over.

[Parkbandit]

Bump!

R&R, top 10. Almost no critical comments. I win!

Awesome! When it's published, I'm sure you will bump this thread with a link to it.

[Faent]

Awesome! When it's published, I'm sure you will bump this thread with a link to it.

Doubtful. =)

[CrystalTears]

No proof, so we'll continue to call BS. But you don't care what anyone here thinks about it, right? That's why you bumped the thread, amirite?!

[AnticorRifling]

Which article is yours?

http://www.highlightskids.com/Magazine/July09/h10709highlightsLinks.asp

[NocturnalRob]

Goofus and Gallant FTW

[Parkbandit]

Doubtful. =)

That shocked me about as much as this news:

http://www.poptherapy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/im-gay_330x386.jpg

[Faent]

Bump again. Paper is back on the editor's desk. Now we wait to see the outcome of my R&R. I'm *highly* optimistic. If I have to bump this thread again with a second rejection.... I will be PISSED.

[Faent]

Also, I'd be happy to do something like verify with Kranar (under condition of anonymity) as proof. But like I'm going to let the asshole that is PB know who I am? Yeah right.

[AnticorRifling]

Bump again. Paper is back on the editor's desk. Now we wait to see the outcome of my R&R. I'm *highly* optimistic. If I have to bump this thread again with a second rejection.... I will be PISSED.
Yeah two whole rejections in the big scheme of things is pretty significant.....

[Fallen]

Also, I'd be happy to do something like verify with Kranar (under condition of anonymity) as proof. But like I'm going to let the asshole that is PB know who I am? Yeah right.

What can PB do to you by knowing your name? Find your pic and call you fat or something?

[CrystalTears]

http://www.pagguild.com/files/epeen.gif

[Drisco]

I'm also mad I missed this gem of a thread when it first arrived. This is full of win.

I'm confused why this guy is so concerned about keeping his identity a secret. He is probably a really important figure in the writing business.

[StrayRogue]

Trust me, he's a nobody.

[Parkbandit]

Also, I'd be happy to do something like verify with Kranar (under condition of anonymity) as proof. But like I'm going to let the asshole that is PB know who I am? Yeah right.

Dude relax.. I'm not going to come to your house and beat you up. I stopped kicking nerds in the teeth in high school.